As I mentioned earlier, I’ll share how I personally handle this. The phenomenon is not new, and there are countless methods available.
2x + 15 rule
For smaller tasks (~1–20 hours), I use this technique. I look at the task, estimate the number of hours, double it, and add 15 minutes. The extra 15 minutes is to get started and immerse yourself in the task. Most of the time, it works quite well and is incredibly simple.
Hofstadter multiplier
My teammates track and record the actual time spent on tasks, which is useful for several reasons. First, it helps everyone gain experience with how long typical tasks take, which they can then compare to their own estimates, improving their estimation skills. Second, you can determine your own — or a particular person’s — so-called Hofstadter multiplier. We’re all different, so this is a more advanced, personalized version of the 2x + 15 rule.
Complex projects
The earlier solutions work well for simpler tasks, but complex projects require additional considerations. But first, it’s important to clarify one question:
How much energy can you, or do you want to, invest in the estimate/proposal?
From there, more questions arise:
- Is it a rough indicative proposal or a detailed, itemized one?
- What inputs, expertise, and professionals are needed for the estimate?
- Is all necessary information available?
- How much capacity do you have (if any) for the estimation and/or execution?
- Do you realistically have a chance of winning the work? 🙂
Your answers to these questions will influence the path you choose.
Going back to the planning fallacy for a moment: it can be mitigated by involving a third party or by relying on real data from similar past projects.
That’s why it’s crucial to keep precise records of the time spent on every task so that the data is available later.
In an ideal world, the best approach is for the team that will actually execute the project to estimate it together. But consider how much it costs if a 4–5 person team individually reviews and interprets the materials, discusses them together, collects missing information, breaks down the project into items, and estimates each one using some method. It’s incredibly time-consuming and expensive.
Therefore, as a substitute, it’s good to have an experienced person who’s seen many projects and/or to rely on actual hours from similar past projects. In this case, you only need to account for the differences and unknowns (the risks) at the time of the proposal. Estimation becomes much simpler, faster, and cheaper.
For indicative proposals, I almost always use this latter method, with one important addition: always assume a ±20% variation.
Whoa, be careful!
It may seem like you’ve done something similar before, but hidden behind the scenes are major differences. This can lead to nasty surprises if you rely on data from nearly similar projects. In such cases, it’s wise to consult multiple external teams to benchmark the work. This helps refine the estimate and creates a healthy competitive environment.
And when a detailed, itemized proposal is necessary… There’s no shortcut: you’ll need to apply a methodology. I won’t even attempt to cover this topic here, as there are entire books written about the relevant methodologies.
I’ve been in the product design profession for over 20 years, and I often play the game where, after hearing the requirements, I throw out a number almost off the top of my head. It works surprisingly often, but of course, I wouldn’t even call it indicative. Still, it’s fun.